Stuart Dallas" <stu...@3ft9.com> wrote:
On 18 May 2012, at 14:50, Jim Giner wrote:
Daft is a little harsh. :) 00:40 is just not a time value that is
It may appear harsh, but as far as I'm concerned it is daft to make
assumptions like that. You've essentially disallowed 12:nn am, but allowed
1:nn am, 2:nn am, 3:nn am, etc, because you're not validating the data in a
non-ambiguous way. I have no idea what you're developing, but you're making
a big assumption about the data that you're getting, which may appear
reasonable to you, but to me it's daft. Nothing personal, just my opinion,
which is all I have to offer.
Unless I've missed something, he hasn't disallowed 12:nn am, only 00:nn.
If you're going to only accept 12-hour input, this is the right thing to
do. 00:nn is not a valid 12-hour representation - only times from 1:nn to
12:nn are acceptable. If you were to accept 00:nn, you'd have to also
accept 13:nn-23:nn as well, for consistancy.
Granted, not specifying am or pm adds a layer of ambiguity, but maybe
that's not relevant for this query. For example, maybe there's also a
select field that has am and pm as options.
As it appears that accepting only 12-hour input is part of the brief, Jim
is IMHO doing the right thing.
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php